Following a hockey team is rooted in entertainment. If you
lose the enjoyment, what's the point?
I've never understood how or why people remain constantly
negative towards a team they follow religiously. Dubi's
articles on RFC? You'd think Sather personally stole his
family heirlooms.
There is no nobility in constant criticism. And it's socially
deviant to share your burden for too long with others.
So as I'm going off on vacation for a week, I didn't want my
de Vries criticism to sit on hockeybird for too long. This is
supposed to be fun, folks. So prior to my departure, I offer a
number of optimistic thoughts:
de Vries is de man!
Reports indicate that Sather front-loaded the contract, which
makes de Vries' salary in the cba years $3 million or less.
If de Vries does continue his ascent into first tier standing,
then he will be a bargain. And if he doesn't, as a second-tier
defensemen, his contract is not overly astronomical even in
the anticipated economic climate of the NHL future.
Plus, I can't wait to see de ways in which de NY Post can
de-velop de best headlines with de Vries' name.
The Real Coup
Yes, Colorado GM Lacroix merits praise for having Selanne and
Kariya land in his lap.
But Sather brought in Kovalev and Carter last year at the deadline
in similar coups without committing cba dollars.
And guess what? Over the past two years, Kovalev and Carter have
scored more combined points (273) than Kariya and Selanne combined
(256) in fewer games played.
Roster Flexibility
Sather has accumulated a number of tradeable assets, whereas in years
past we were forced to dangle names like John MacLean, Kevin Stevens,
Luc Robitaille, Stephane Quintal and Sylvain Lefevbre at the trade table.
Now we have a bevy of players who have value either on the ice or at
the bargaining table ... Lindros, Poti, Carter, Dunham, Blackburn,
Lundmark, Tjutin, Murray, Kovalev, etc.
Perhaps this luxury is why tensions get so high when tales of inflated
contracts and mediocre talent is rumored coming our way. We finally
have an exciting roster if it's developed correctly, and everyone
believes they have the chemistry solution. And I'll bet no one here got
better than a "b" in chemistry in high school. Admit it.
Kids and Size
Sather has stocked (or kept) a number of young players in the organization.
Blackburn, Tjutin, Lundmark, Murray, Jessiman spring to mind as
legitimate options to occupy significant roles on the team in the next
1-3 years. Now as long as they don't eat any horsemeat, that's not too bad.
And, Sather has made this squad a more physical team that can stand up to
the Eastern play. Holik, Kaspar, Lacouture, Petro, de Vries, and Barnaby are
just some of the names that can get in other's faces.
Sure, the pieces still need to fit better, but at least the pieces are there -
it's a far cry from the Niklas Sundstrom-Marc Savard years.
Accountability
Beneath Sather's calm, cigar chomping demeanor must exist a fiery
competitive spirit. He showed that as a player, and he can't be that
arrogant without having a chip on the shoulder.
Now he's positioned himself in a corner. Succeed, or else his reputation
in the league comes tumbling down. Earlier, one could point to his
poor coaching selections, but absolve him on the player acquisition front.
No longer.
Judgement day for Sather. This is his roster, three years after his hiring.
It's his calls - from coaching strategy, to the roster, to ice time.
His detractors can cynically point to it as a cost-cutting move, but
that's cowardly. Sather is putting himself in the line of fire of the
sniping New York media. That's a respectable way to face the situation.
News and Notes
I anticipate that Dale Purinton is a goner. Though not getting much
attention, Sather is harping on mistake-free hockey. He highlighted
that goal again when he introduced de Vries. That doesn't bode well
for Dale.
Haven't heard any development on Sandy McCarthy. Sather's first
move as GM was to bring in Sandy to fill an enforcer role, and he's
consistently acquired those types of players (Oliwa, McKenna). Expect
a move for an enforcer before the season, or else Dale may have a
spot after all on the fourth line.
7 points away from overtaking Gordie Howe on the all-time points list.
I'm certain Sather has no clue whether Mark Messier will return this
season. Hopefully Messier can get his points, then when he gets his
injury at the 20-game mark that historically he "heroically" plays
through, he can instead bow out gracefully right then with a nice MSG
ceremony and motorcycle. (That's optimistic, right?)
Have fun with the rumor-filled next few weeks, folks. Otherwise,
what's the point?
-Gabe
Posted by Gabe at July 15, 2003 10:15 PMeMail this entry!
Always love the f or f articles Gabe - great work!
Posted by: LordPerth on July 16, 2003 06:48 AMGabe,
As usual, top notch. Thanks for putting things back into perspective. I agree that part of the reason the trade rumors are so frustrating is that most seem like lousy return for some of the first actual tradable talent it feels like the Rangers have had in years.
PS: Straight A's in HS Chem - but don't ask me to remember any of it now. Titration, molar weight and Avogadro's number are many years past ;)
Posted by: Chris on July 16, 2003 01:20 PMFact: That you choose to attack a fan writer of another website makes you look petty and jealous since you failed to offer any kind of reasons for Ranger fans to look at next season with a positive view.
Fact: you waffled on your views by saying the de Vries contract was ok after spending quite a bit of time finding fault with the signing. That doesn't do a lot for your credibility here.
Fact or Fiction: You wanted to compare the stats of Kariya and Selanne vs Kovalev and Carter. Interesting that you don't want to mention what numbers they had when the 2 Avs had when they last played together as a unit. You want to call spending what is expected to be about 10 mil on Carter and Kovalev a coup over the 7 mil the Avs spent on their players?
Fiction: your knowledge of players like Tjutin and Murray both who had lost seasons last year due to injuries and other factors that says NEITHER are going to be NHL ready. Not to mention in the case of Murray even his own Hartford coach says he will be at best a 3rd liner.
Fact: Petro is only 5'11 so where is his size?
Fact: Jessiman is 3 years away from joining the organization and is still considered a project by even the Rangers.
Fiction: Slats is putting himself in line of fire. Slats doesn't care about what the media or fans say about him. He has Junior watching his back. Try this one on, Slats is coaching because few coaches wanted to be a part of what might be a lame duck season.
Pehaps instead of jumping on someone who doesn't write for this site why not check what you say before just saying it.
You look really petty here and a cheapshot artist no less
Posted by: A Real Ranger fan on July 18, 2003 01:29 AMGlen Sather DID steal my family heirlooms. Even though I argued strongly during his last season that Neil Smith's time had come, and even though I couldn't find fault with fans who hated John Muckler, in the end they bequeathed me (and Glen Sather) Mike York, Kim Johnsson, Radek Dvorak, Jan Hlavac, Jamie Lundmark, Tomas Kloucek, Pavel Brendl, Manny Malhotra, Mike Mottau, Jason Doig, and Dale Purinton. Except for Lundmark and Purinton, Sather traded every almost single one of them for older players, along with quite a few of young assets of his own (Novak, Heisten, Berard, Samuelsson, Brad Brown, Smrek, Lintner, Fata, Holmqvist and a top ten draft pick).
They're not all gonna be NHLers, or good ones necessarily, but the guys we got for them? They haven't done all that much, have they. So my eight year old daughter has to watch a parade of over the hill veterans come and go (to the bank), losing the whole while, instead of growing up together with a team of her own.
By the way, doesn't matter how a contract is structured -- the NHL has already said it will apply the average amount of the entire contract to a team's salary structure for purposes of determining cap compliance. Nobility lies in doing your homework.
Posted by: Dubi on July 18, 2003 02:44 AMWait. Did you go from badmouthing the de Vries deal to applauding it?
Hello consistency.
As for Carter, Kovalev and Bure, wake me up when each of them hits 30 goals in a blueshirt.
Wait. Did you go from badmouthing the de Vries deal to applauding it?
Hello consistency.
As for Carter, Kovalev and Bure, wake me up when each of them hits 30 goals in a blueshirt.
Wait. Did you go from badmouthing the de Vries deal to applauding it?
Hello consistency.
As for Carter, Kovalev and Bure, wake me up when each of them hits 30 goals in a blueshirt.
Wait. Did you go from badmouthing the de Vries deal to applauding it?
Hello consistency.
As for Carter, Kovalev and Bure, wake me up when each of them hits 30 goals in a blueshirt.
My apologies for the spam, my connection kept timing out, and refreshing made it seem as if the data was not going through.
Posted by: Beamer on July 18, 2003 01:39 PMDubi writes: "By the way, doesn't matter how a contract is structured -- the NHL has already said it will apply the average amount of the entire contract to a team's salary structure for purposes of determining cap compliance. Nobility lies in doing your homework."
Homework indeed, Dubi. Homework is generally just rote work teachers give to their students "because that's the way it's done", yet it rarely helps them become better critical thinkers or gives them an undertsanding as to WHY they should know what they're being taught. They just know it has to be done, robot-like.
Which is why your comment about doing "homework" in regards to the NHL's plan to average out salaries for the cap is so apropos.
1. Gary Bettman can say all players must wear silver hotpants from now on, it doesn't make it any more likely to happen just because he said it. His comments are like those signs at amusement parks and boat yards, "the management is not responsible for any personal losses or injury". A statement or a sign does not make something true or legal.
2. Think about it. Nearly every team in the NHL right now has a few players under graduated salary contracts, paying them less in potential "cap seasons". Bettman and the NHL aren't their own separate entity, they are the governing body paid for and of the purpose to represent the owners. So why would the owners want to shoot themselves in the foot by undoing the graduated salary contracts they signed their own players to??
3. Everyone just assumes a hard cap is coming. Why? But, this issue is too long to really get into here.
So before you want to talk people down for not doing their homework, the ability to do homework in and of itself is no major feat without applying any critical thinking to it.
Posted by: Rocha on July 18, 2003 05:18 PMRocha,
And Dubi and Jess have come over to take issue with you. Might as well kill yourself before trying to make sense to those two blowhards.
Posted by: Ebase on July 23, 2003 02:07 PMRocha, you use a literal definition of homework to try to do an end run on Gabe's lack of research, and you also try to use the lack of certainty of a future event to try to help him cover up for his lack of knowledge of that possibility.
But what you haven't been able to do is provide any support for Gabe's contention that "his [Devries] contract is not overly astronomical even in the anticipated economic climate of the NHL future." That's because his statement based on the front-loading of the contract, and therefore doesn't take into account the NHL's stated aim of averaging out contract values for salary cap purposes, a distinct enough possibility that any educated writer would want to take into account, especially since GMs are taking it into account in the way they are structuring contracts this season.
Ebase, do you need to be reminded that I did not "come over to take issue with" anyone, that I was taken issue with in the original article? Or does that not make any sense to you? No, didn't think so.
Posted by: Dubi on July 23, 2003 04:13 PMRocha, you use a literal definition of homework to try to do an end run on Gabe's lack of research, and you also try to use the lack of certainty of a future event to try to help him cover up for his lack of knowledge of that possibility.
But what you haven't been able to do is provide any support for Gabe's contention that "his [Devries] contract is not overly astronomical even in the anticipated economic climate of the NHL future." That's because his statement based on the front-loading of the contract, and therefore doesn't take into account the NHL's stated aim of averaging out contract values for salary cap purposes, a distinct enough possibility that any educated writer would want to take into account, especially since GMs are taking it into account in the way they are structuring contracts this season.
Ebase, do you need to be reminded that I did not "come over to take issue with" anyone, that I was taken issue with in the original article? Or does that not make any sense to you? No, didn't think so.
Posted by: Dubi on July 23, 2003 04:18 PMRocha, you use a literal definition of homework to try to do an end run on Gabe's lack of research, and you also try to use the lack of certainty of a future event to try to help him cover up for his lack of knowledge of that possibility.
But what you haven't been able to do is provide any support for Gabe's contention that "his [Devries] contract is not overly astronomical even in the anticipated economic climate of the NHL future." That's because his statement based on the front-loading of the contract, and therefore doesn't take into account the NHL's stated aim of averaging out contract values for salary cap purposes, a distinct enough possibility that any educated writer would want to take into account, especially since GMs are taking it into account in the way they are structuring contracts this season.
Ebase, do you need to be reminded that I did not "come over to take issue with" anyone, that I was taken issue with in the original article? Or does that not make any sense to you? No, didn't think so.
Posted by: Dubi on July 23, 2003 04:23 PM
|
Recent Articles
|
|
|